Role Play Scenarios: Debate

THE TRIAL OF FAKE NEWS

This role play represents a court of law with the goal of analyzing the process of fake news.

This activity is an interactive role-play simulation designed to help participants develop critical thinking and media literacy skills.

 

In this simulation, a viral social media post is “put on trial,” and participants must investigate whether the information is reliable, misleading, or false.

 

Participants take on different roles such as judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, digital experts, journalists, and witnesses. Each role contributes to the investigation of the claim by collecting evidence, analyzing sources, questioning testimonies, and presenting arguments.

 

The structure of the activity mirrors a court trial. The prosecution attempts to prove that the viral content is misleading or false, while the defense tries to support its credibility or challenge the methods used to disprove it.

 

Digital experts assist both sides by using online verification tools, and journalists document the process and prepare a report after the trial.

 

The activity concludes with a reflection session where participants discuss what strategies were most effective and how these methods can be applied in everyday digital environments such as social media, messaging apps, or online news platforms.

Phase

Description

Kick-off

Show the viral post (printed or projected).

Examples:

 

“Drink Beverage X and cure your cold in just 24 hours! A secret study by European researchers shows it eliminates the virus naturally. Pharmaceutical companies don’t want you to know this. Share before it gets deleted!”

 

“BREAKING: A video showing a strange creature swimming near the coast of Italy has gone viral. Some users claim it proves that a previously unknown sea animal has been discovered. Others believe the footage was secretly recorded by fishermen and then removed from official reports.”

 

Assign roles

Judges – Prosecution – Defense – Digital experts – Journalists – Witnesses 

Evidence search

The prosecution and defense work in separate teams with the digital experts to collect: screenshots, sources, original images, graphics.

 

Journalists observe and interview.

Hearing

a) Opening remarks by judges

 

b) Prosecution closing arguments + cross-examination

 

c) Defense closing arguments + cross-examination + Witness testimonies

 

d) Final discussion among judges behind closed doors (5 min)

Verdict

The judges declare: Hoax / Partially true / Credible –

giving reasons based on evidence.

Debriefing

Which verification step proved decisive?

 

What is the difference between “lack of evidence” and “evidence of falsity”?

 

How can we apply this method in everyday life (social media, chat)?

 

What responsibility do those who share disinformation have compared to those who create it?

suggested activity time

The timing below is a guideline. Depending on the number of participants, the depth of the discussion, and the facilitation style, each phase may take more or less time.

 

Kick-off – approximately 10 minutes
The facilitator introduces the activity and presents the viral post that will be analyzed during the simulation.

 

Role Assignment – approximately 5 minutes
Participants are assigned their roles and receive a brief explanation of their responsibilities.

 

Evidence Research – approximately 40 minutes
The prosecution and defense teams work separately with the support of digital experts to collect evidence such as screenshots, sources, original images, statistics, or scientific references. Journalists observe the process and conduct short interviews with participants.

 

Court Hearing – approximately 45 minutes

  • Opening by the judges (about 5 minutes)

  • Prosecution statement (about 8 minutes) + cross-examination (about 4 minutes)

  • Defense statement (about 8 minutes) + cross-examination (about 4 minutes)

  • Witness testimonies (– about 8 minutes total)

  • Judges’ private deliberation (about 5 minutes)

Verdict – approximately 10 minutes
The judges present their decision and explain whether the claim is false, partially true, or credible, supporting their reasoning with the evidence presented.

 

Debriefing – approximately 20 minutes
Participants reflect on the process, the verification strategies used, and the lessons learned.

ROLES

  •  Judges – They sets the pace, ensures fairness.
  • Prosecutor – highlights inconsistencies, appeals to social responsibility.
  • Defense attorney – seeks confirmation, challenges methodologies.
  • Digital expert – masters tools (TinEye, Google Lens, Wayback).
  • Journalist – notes quotes, prepares a post-trial article.
  • Witnesses

Toolkit and materials

Quick links for fact-checking:

 

  1. Google Fact Check Explorer
  2. InVID & WeVerify Video/Frame analyzer
  3. WHO, PubMed, ISS open data

 

Clue sheet (document already set up with suspicious URLs, low-quality images, conflicting dates).

 

Report template (collaborative Google Doc or digital pad).

 

“5 W + S” checklist for evaluating sources (Who, What, Where, When, Why + Source).

Some sheet you can use

Click the buttons to download

Source Credibility Checklist
Credibility Verdict Sheet

“Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or European Education and Culture Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.”